ZeroTech TRACE ADV 3-18×44 FFP Shoot2Hunt

[ZeroTech Optics]

View attachment 1053158

Yes, the standard neoprene sleeve, these are not scope caps to be clear

 

[ZeroTech Optics]

They will be available through zerotech. Not through UM/S2H for international orders.

@ZeroTech Optics

Correct, they will for sure be available in OZ. Our OZ team has a hugely successful dealer network so they will likely be on the shelf with very limited sales direct from the website as this item will be in high demand among dealers. There will be no pre order outside the US and sales will follow the traditional model vs. here in the states where it is exclusive to UM/S2H

 

[Aussie Dan]

Correct, they will for sure be available in OZ. Our OZ team has a hugely successful dealer network so they will likely be on the shelf with very limited sales direct from the website as this item will be in high demand among dealers. There will be no pre order outside the US and sales will follow the traditional model vs. here in the states where it is exclusive to UM/S2H

Im looking forward to the Aussie release dates and pricing

 

[Marbles]

…. Alright.

That may be what you’re talking about but it’s not what I’m talking about.

I’m just saying if you’re selling scopes that exist because of the field evaluations, there should be a normal documented field evaluation in the field evaluation forum location for prospective buyers when they are being sold.

I don’t get why this is so complicated.

I’ve sent this scope to friends and it’s frankly weird that I can’t also just send them the field evaluation link, but I can for a random ass leupold that doesn’t pass. Even worse I can easily find a field evaluation for a zero tech trace that doesn’t pass. Instead I have to send them a disaster of a thread and tell them to search for shit

My takeaway, which may be wrong, is until they have it in stock, they are not trying to push demand too hard. Having to go through this dumpster fire keeps pre-order buyers to the dedicated and helps avoid accusations of self dealing by posting a review on a product that is not yet available.

This is one of those situations were they cannot make everyone happy. Personally I think the current approach is probably the correct one at present, but there is nothing but opinion, even for the people making the decisions.

 

[NSI]

What Makes This Collaboration Different

Plenty of brands sponsor influencers.

Very few invite them into product development.

For two years, ZeroTech worked directly with Shoot2Hunt and the Rokslide community to understand exactly what a modern backcountry scope must be — and what it absolutely cannot be.

Not just lighter.
Not just feature-packed.
Not just affordable.

It had to survive.

Rokslide’s field evaluation is widely regarded as the toughest optic torture test in the industry. Drop tests. Impact tests. Real-world abuse. Most scopes don’t pass. That’s not opinion — it’s documented history.

As a scope manufacturer, designing something that survives those tests is not simple. ZeroStop systems fail. Turrets shift. Internals lose integrity. Mechanical tolerances that look good on paper don’t always hold up when gravity gets involved.

Passing that evaluation required rethinking durability from the inside out.

This wasn’t a marketing collaboration. It was a development collaboration.

And it resulted in something the industry hasn’t seen before:
A community-shaped optic that earned its place.

What It Took to Pass Field Evaluation​

Backcountry rifles get dropped.
They get knocked against rocks.
They ride in scabbards.
They fall over in snow.

If a scope can’t handle that, nothing else matters.

The ZeroTech x Rokslide 3-18×44 FFP was engineered specifically to meet the mechanical realities of field evaluation:

• Reinforced turret system integrity
• Controlled internal tolerances to protect tracking repeatability
• Structural durability without unnecessary weight
• Impact resilience while maintaining zero

At approximately 26 ounces, this is not an ultralight compromise optic. It’s a balanced, durable, backcountry-ready system built to survive and perform.

It passed. And that matters.

The Features — Earned, Not Added​

This scope wasn’t loaded with features to look good on paper. Every element exists because it had to.

• First Focal Plane (FFP)
• 3-18×44 Magnification Range
• 30mm Tube
• Push-Button Illumination (IR)
• Capped Windage
• Low Profile Elevation Turret with ZeroStop
• Locking Diopter
• Mil Reticle Variants (Two Options)

Built for serious shooters. No clutter. No gimmicks.

Every decision was debated. Tested. Refined.

Because the Rokslide audience doesn’t tolerate fluff.

I love the sentiment, but ... it would have been so hard to have a human write this?

-J

 

[BBob]

Instead I have to send them a disaster of a thread and tell them to search for shit

In less than 5 minutes I was able to find the posts with testing within the two main threads on or about this scope. All that you and they seek are within these two searches.

https://rokslide.com/forums/search/11176890/?page=1&t=post&c%5Bthread%5D=440916&c%5Busers%5D=Formidilosus&o=date

https://rokslide.com/forums/search/11176903/?page=1&t=post&c%5Bthread%5D=373983&c%5Busers%5D=Formidilosus&o=date

 

[DangerRanger]

In less than 5 minutes I was able to find the posts with testing within the two main threads on or about this scope. All that you and they seek are within these two searches.

https://rokslide.com/forums/search/11176890/?page=1&t=post&c%5Bthread%5D=440916&c%5Busers%5D=Formidilosus&o=date

https://rokslide.com/forums/search/11176903/?page=1&t=post&c%5Bthread%5D=373983&c%5Busers%5D=Formidilosus&o=date

I don’t personally think searching through all of forms posts is the answer, but I get how that does work and it is what I’ve done, I just wish it were cleaner and simpler than it was and is. My opinion for the best option was as stated, a post in the eval forum for a prototype and then a post for a rando of the first batch.

My takeaway, which may be wrong, is until they have it in stock, they are not trying to push demand too hard. Having to go through this dumpster fire keeps pre-order buyers to the dedicated and helps avoid accusations of self dealing by posting a review on a product that is not yet available.

I think you are correct

This is one of those situations were they cannot make everyone happy. Personally I think the current approach is probably the correct one at present, but there is nothing but opinion, even for the people making the decisions.

I think you are correct, but was originally just expressing my own opinion that they should have done both. That’s really it, feels like it’s gotten blown way out of proportion for the amount I care.

 

[BBob]

I don’t personally think searching through all of forms posts is the answer, but I get how that does work and it is what I’ve done, I just wish it were cleaner and simpler than it was and is. My opinion for the best option was as stated, a post in the eval forum for a prototype and then a post for a rando of the first batch.

The tests are on him and he’s kind of in a spot I think in trying to stay independent in the testing but on the flip side being so closely tied to the companies getting them made. He’s said he should do it but only he knows why he hasn’t yet. Mby he’s just waiting on one of the production runs to come through and test out of that bunch. That makes some sense to me. Even though they’ve said the initial three aren’t really prototypes they aren’t from a true production run either.